Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list xfs); Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:17:32 -0800 (PST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0-r574664 (2007-09-11) on oss.sgi.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.0-r574664 Received: from larry.melbourne.sgi.com (larry.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.52.130]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/SuSE Linux 0.7) with SMTP id m1B0HLfv023561 for ; Sun, 10 Feb 2008 16:17:23 -0800 Received: from snort.melbourne.sgi.com (snort.melbourne.sgi.com [134.14.54.149]) by larry.melbourne.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/950213.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id LAA01229; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:17:35 +1100 Received: from snort.melbourne.sgi.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by snort.melbourne.sgi.com (SGI-8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id m1B0HWLF58832737; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:17:33 +1100 (AEDT) Received: (from dgc@localhost) by snort.melbourne.sgi.com (SGI-8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id m1B0HSFt58727187; Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:17:28 +1100 (AEDT) X-Authentication-Warning: snort.melbourne.sgi.com: dgc set sender to dgc@sgi.com using -f Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 11:17:28 +1100 From: David Chinner To: Sven Geggus Cc: David Chinner , xfs@oss.sgi.com, Tobias Ulmer , Andrea Perotti Subject: Re: [PATCH] Possible fix for 2.6.24 xfs_file_readdir crash Message-ID: <20080211001727.GO155407@sgi.com> References: <20080205052418.GU155259@sgi.com> <20080209120423.GA6699@diesel.geggus.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080209120423.GA6699@diesel.geggus.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/5767/Sun Feb 10 12:57:54 2008 on oss.sgi.com X-Virus-Status: Clean X-archive-position: 14394 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: dgc@sgi.com Precedence: bulk X-list: xfs On Sat, Feb 09, 2008 at 01:04:24PM +0100, Sven Geggus wrote: > David Chinner schrieb am Dienstag, den 05. Februar um 06:24 Uhr: > > > Can you try the patch attached below > > Am I correct in the assumption, that this did not make it into > 2.6.24.1? Right - the fix wasn't in Linus' kernel by the time 2.6.24.1 was released. > Can we reckon that this patch will get included in one of the next > minor releases? Already queued for 2.6.24.2. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner Principal Engineer SGI Australian Software Group